Today, David Axelrod was quoted as saying that President Obama would not be scrutinizing the 410 billion appropriations bill because it was old business that should have been passed under Bush 'administration.
Mr. Obama? Ummm, it's coming to you for your signature. Not former President Bush. If it's coming to you for your signature, then it's your responsibility. Period. Dot. End of discussion.
To really understand the difference between what Mr. Obama says and does,, look back to Bill Clinton when he was questioned about Monica- I did not have sex with that woman. -- then later, he argued we really need to look at his definition of sex.
Semantics. Down here in Texas, we call it bullcrap. We also call it dishonest. Where is the transparency? Where are these "highest ethical standards"? What happened to reforming how Washington does business?
If I apply the common morals and ethics of most law abiding, tax paying citizens, then Mr. Obama is a lying, cheating, scheming stealing politician who said whatever he had to in order to get elected.
Granted, all politicians lie, but this one ran on a reformers platform. He ran on a ethics and transparency platform. I think he'll end up finding they weigh like and anchor on a drowning man.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment